Editorial: Yes, there was collusion

Lawyers for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, seated second from right, have acknowledged that he shared polling data with suspected Russian intelligence associate Konstantin Kilimnik, seated at far left. This 2006 photo was obtained by the Associated Press as part of a collection of internal records of Manafort’s consulting firm.

Photo: Associated Press

That Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman provided polling data to a suspected Russian intelligence associate seemingly undermines another aggressively capitalized presidential mantra: that there was “NO COLLUSION.” The exchange of valuable political information between representatives of Trump’s campaign and Vladimir Putin’s regime shows that the two entities were, to some extent, colluding.

In the spring of 2016, while Trump was seeking the Republican nomination, former campaign chairman and current convicted felon Paul Manafort shared the data with Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the FBI has linked to Russian military intelligence, reportedly for further distribution to pro-Russia Ukrainian oligarchs. Manafort’s own lawyers appear to have inadvertently revealed the contact this week in responding to allegations that their client deceived Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators about Kilimnik and other matters despite having agreed to cooperate with them.

While the nature and utility of the information remain unknown, Senate Intelligence Committee reports have detailed the savvy with which a Kremlin-led social media campaign targeted messages to boost Trump’s support and discourage those likely to vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton. It’s the sort of effort that could have benefited from closely held, high-priced internal polling data.

It’s not clear whether Trump himself was aware of Manafort’s activities. The operative had long-standing ties to Russia, having run a presidential campaign for Putin’s man in Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, and amassed debts to a Russian oligarch and Putin ally, Oleg Deripaska, all of which could have motivated him to peddle information for his own reasons. That said, this isn’t an isolated instance of contact between the campaign and Russia. The Trump Tower meeting involving Trump’s eldest son and a Kremlin-linked lawyer is another infamous example.

The president, for his part, has already said he “didn’t know anything about” Manafort’s exchange with Kilimnik. The trouble is that he also once falsely denied knowledge of payoffs to two women who alleged extramarital affairs with him. Moreover, any effort to distance himself from or disparage Manafort will be complicated by his effusive praise for the former campaign chairman when he was defying Mueller.

Manafort’s lawyers acknowledged that their client and Kilimnik also discussed a peace plan for Ukraine, where Russia has supported separatist warfare and seized Crimea. The 2016 softening of the Republican platform’s stance on Ukraine was among Trump’s early policy gifts to Russia, which have continued long after Manafort’s service. On Thursday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin appeared before a congressional committee to defend lifting sanctions on companies linked to Deripaska — more potential fruits of a collaboration between the Trump campaign operative and Russia.

This commentary is from The Chronicle’s editorial board. We invite you to express your views in a letter to the editor. Please submit your letter via our online form: SFChronicle.com/letters.